Gastro-esophageal Reflux, are we thick enough?

Making the milk thicker, in order to make it harder to reflux, has a long history in the treatment of GE reflux, or spitting-up babies. As I mentioned in a previous post there are some thickeners that have been associated with NEC, specifically xanthan gum.

In general, in good studies, the effects of thickeners have been modest or absent, in terms of reducing reflux. One group has previously studied Gaviscon, which is an alginate that sort of clots in the stomach, so reducing reflux. They showed that it did reduce reflux, but did not reduce apnea.

The most recent study from that same group looked at the effects of another agent, amylopectin. They again showed in a small cross-over RCT that thickening reduced reflux (in this case acid reflux but not non-acid reflux) but did not reduce apnea, the most parsimonious explanation for this is that reflux has nothing to do with apnea.

That is exactly the interpretation that Christian Poets puts on the data in his accompanying editorial .

In fact Corvaglia and colleagues are the only group that has consistently shown a relationship between reflux and apnea. If you look at their data closely, it appears that the apneas that they find after feeds more than between feeds, and that they seem to show are associated with reflux on Multi-luminal impedance monitoring, are short apneas of 5 seconds or more. It does not appear that pathologic apneas, with associated hypoxia and bradycardia are associated, even in their studies. Maybe this is the difference to other investigators, and the reason why those others, who only looked at longer, pathological apneas, have not found any association.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

Probiotics: more than enough!

Yet another small RCT of probiotics. This time 150 infants less than 1500 grams birth weight in an NICU in Mexico were randomized to a mixture of 4 different Lactobacilli and Bifidobacterium infantis or control. There was a reduction in NEC stage 2 or greater (6/75 vs 12/75) of about the same magnitude as all the other trials. They also had lower mortality, and no adverse effects.

Probiotics dec 2012

Here is the funnel plot with the new new study added. I can only say it again, its time we stopped doing placebo controlled RCTs and focused on finding the best preparation, and the optimal dose and timing. RCTs in women at risk of preterm delivery are also a good idea.

Posted in Neonatal Research | 2 Comments

Reducing Global Neonatal Mortality

Melinda Gates has written a column in the Economist where she notes that the improvements in child and maternal mortality seen in response to the millennium development goals have not been reflected in reductions in neonatal mortality. The column is short, and optimistic. I hope her optimism is well placed.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged | Leave a comment

Weekly Updates #18

Abbas W, Attia NI, Hassanein SM: Two-stage single-volume exchange transfusion in severe hemolytic disease of the newborn. The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine. 2012, 25(7):1080-1083. In this randomized clinical trial the authors did 104 exchange transfusions, they randomized the infants to either have a standard double volume exchange or the experimental technique which was to wait for 3 hours between the 2 single volume exchanges. The immediate effects were identical with a good lowering of the bilirubin, but the intervention group had much less rebound after the exchange was finished, to about 210 rather than 290. Unfortunately the report doesn’t clearly state when the rebound levels were taken, or even if they were measured at the same time in each group, but it looks like they were taken at 3 hours post exchange according to one of the tables. Also fewer of the intervention group needed as 2nd exchange.

In my hospital to do a study with 104 exchanges would take about 104 years, which means 2 things to me, 1. to improve techniques and treatments for severe jaundice we have to rely on studies from countries without well established anti-rhesus IgG programs. 2. Those countries need to develop anti-rhesus IgG programs!

Berry J, Griffiths M, Westcott C: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of tongue-tie division and its immediate effect on breastfeeding. Breastfeed Med 2012, 7(3):189-193. This is one of the oldest debates in care of the newborn, does tongue-tie affect feeding, and does cutting the tie improve feeding. This was an RCT in breastfed babies. The observer scoring the rbeastfeeding adn the mother were masked as to whether an actual frenulotomy had been performed or not, the baby was taken away from the mother, either a real or sham frenulotomy was performed and the babe was then returned to the mother with a piece of gauze under the tongue. There were 30 babies in each group, and the primary outcome was improvement in breast feeding. The tongue tie group had 78% of the babies feeding improved after the procedure and the controls 48%.

there are a couple of issues with this study, 1 I don’t know if you should really call this double blind as the baby probably knew it had the procedure! and 2. seriously this time, there was no anesthetic or analgesic used. I think that is appalling. there is no reason why a little topical anesthetic or at least some analgesia, such as sucrose, could not be given. The authors state that there is a NICE guidance, which they say requested further studies to provide evidence ‘that division of tongue-tie without an anesthetic in infants is safe,  successful, and acceptable to parents’. In fact the guidance requests no such thing. The NICE review notes that the procedure is usually performed without anesthesia, and suggests further studies, but does not suggest further studies without anesthesia, it is in fact silent on the issue as far as a recommendation is performed. Also the study was actually performed in 2003 and 2004, so they can’t use the NICE guidance published in 2005 as justification for not giving analgesia. Some infants do sleep through the procedure, but others cry and do demonstrate pain responses.

It certainly now looks like division of a tongue tie improves poor breast feeding, as well as reducing nipple pain ( as shown previously) so a referral to someone who has been trained to do it seems appropriate, but find someone who gives an anesthetic, or at least some analgesic.

Autrata R, Krejcirova I, Senkova K, Holousova M, Dolezel Z, Borek I: Intravitreal pegaptanib combined with diode laser therapy for stage 3+ retinopathy of prematurity in zone i and posterior zone ii. European journal of ophthalmology 2012, 22(5):687-694. This multi-center RCT of retinopathy treatment enrolled a very high risk group of babies. Stage 3 with plus in zone 1 or poterior zone 2. They compared laser plus pegaptanib, a VEGF-165 inhibitor. Apparently this agent is more selective than the one that was used in the BEAT-ROP trial (called bevacizumab) it is an RNA aptamer whatever that means! The biggest other difference between this trial and BEAT-ROP is that all the babies in both groups got laser therapy. The conventional treatment group received laser therapy ‘combined with cryotherapy’ but the cryo is never described, we don’t know who got cryo for what indications. The authors state that they followed the ETROP recommendations, but those recommendations don’t suggest combined laser and cryotherapy, so I don’t undestand this at all.

One of the major advantages of anti-VEGF treatment as far as I can see is avoidance of laser. Laser therapy injures the peripheral retina, requires a very sedated baby, often one who has to be re-intubated for the procedure, and as many of the babies also have BPD, avoiding re-intubation is a big advantage. The primary outcome of this trial was recurrence of stage 3+ disease, and there was significantly less recurrence after pegaptanib than after conventional therapy, 15% versus 50%.

Pasquali SK, Ohye RG, Lu M, Kaltman J, Caldarone CA, Pizarro C, Dunbar-Masterson C, Gaynor JW, Jacobs JP, Kaza AK et al: Variation in perioperative care across centers for infants undergoing the norwood procedure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012, 144(4):915-921.
Ohye RG, Schonbeck JV, Eghtesady P, Laussen PC, Pizarro C, Shrader P, Frank DU, Graham EM, Hill KD, Jacobs JP et al: Cause, timing, and location of death in the single ventricle reconstruction trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012, 144(4):907-914.
Tabbutt S, Ghanayem N, Ravishankar C, Sleeper LA, Cooper DS, Frank DU, Lu M, Pizarro C, Frommelt P, Goldberg CS et al: Risk factors for hospital morbidity and mortality after the norwood procedure: A report from the pediatric heart network single ventricle reconstruction trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012, 144(4):882-895.
Ghanayem NS, Allen KR, Tabbutt S, Atz AM, Clabby ML, Cooper DS, Eghtesady P, Frommelt PC, Gruber PJ, Hill KD et al: Interstage mortality after the norwood procedure: Results of the multicenter single ventricle reconstruction trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012, 144(4):896-906.
These publications are all from the Single Ventricle Reconstruction Trial, which was a surgical RCT of about 550 infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome randomized to different forms of the Norwood procedure. These secondary analyses show that there are enormous variations in many different aspects of perioperative care, and that many babies die between different stages of the surgical repair. Bravo to the collaborators for doing a very difficult trial. The next stage will be to do more trials to find out which of these differences in care really have an impact on clinical outcomes.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

Is the glass 81% full or 19% empty?

The new Epicure 2 data show encouraging trends in outcomes in the UK and Ireland for extremely preterm babies. Survival rates have improved significantly over the whole of the British Isles, Here for example is one of the figures from the long term outcome publication.

epicure2

As you can see the proportion of survivors has increased, and the proportion of severely impaired survivors has not changed, when expressed as a proportion of the survivors. When expressed as a proportion of the number of babies who can be stabilized at birth and are admitted to NICU this means that the proportion of admissions who are severely impaired has increased. So in 1995 there were 266 survivors of 666 babies admitted, 39%; of them 19% (51 infants) were severely impaired, so the percentage of the original 666 babies who were admitted for intensive care who survive with a severe impairment is 51/666 = 7.7%. In 2006 there were proportionally many more survivors; 593 survivors of 1115 babies admitted, 53%. 19% of them (113) had severe impairments, the percentage of the original 1115 babies admitted for intensive care who survive with a severe impairment is 113/1115 = 10.1%.

Now you can interpret these data according to your own prejudices, and that is indeed what has been happening. The editorial accompanying the publications in the BMJ was very negatively slanted. That editorial, written by 2 individuals from the Netherlands, includes the following quotes ‘a greater absolute number of neonates had major morbidity’, ‘the prevalence of important adverse neurological and developmental outcomes had indeed not improved’ and ‘of 100 neonates born at 24 weeks, 60 will die despite intensive care, and of the 40 survivors 12 will have serious impairments’ (this is actually a serious error! Fifteen or nineteen percent of the survivors at 24 weeks gestation had serious impairments, which means that of the 40 survivors in their scenario there would be 6 or 7 with serious impairments).

One other quote: ‘Similar outcome data are seen in the Netherlands, and neonatal intensive care is therefore not offered routinely to neonates born before 24 completed weeks’ gestation.’ This is also untrue, there are no similar outcome data from the Netherlands. As there are no survivors at 23 weeks in the Netherlands, and until recently there were no survivors at 24 weeks either, they do not have data to make that statement.

I think that anyone looking at the graph at the top of this post without any pre-existing prejudices (like me for example) would say that there have been major advances. In the context of a huge increase in the absolute number of extremely preterm infants, there are major improvements in survival with a stable proportion of impairments among the survivors. With an overall prevalence of severe disability among the survivors of 19% why do we persist in focusing on those infants? I know it is vitally important that those infants receive early evaluation and effective services and interventions. But surely we can also emphasize that 81% of these infants, who would all be dead if it wasn’t for NICU, are free of serious impairment.

The authors of the editorial appear to be of the opinion that it is OK for 81% of the potential survivors to die to avoid the survival of the 19% who have severe impairments. I beg to differ.

Posted in Advocating for impaired children | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

I am Epicurious…

Two publications have just appeared from the EPICURE 2 study. The first (Costeloe KL, Hennessy EM, Haider S, Stacey F, Marlow N, Draper ES: Short term outcomes after extreme preterm birth in England: comparison of two birth cohorts in 1995 and 2006 (the EPICure studies). BMJ 2012, 345:e7976) describes the survival and serious complications among all the babies born in the UK and Ireland during 2006. It also compares the figures with EPICURE 1, which ran for 10 months in 1995.

One of the issues with the first EPICURE cohort was the large number of infants who were born outside of tertiary care centers and never transferred for intensive care, or who remained in tiny units that only looked after one or two such babies a year. Of course their outcomes are not as good as centers who do it all the time. Part of the UK response to the EPICURE results was to improve regionalisation, and there is a higher proportion of extremely preterm babies born in centers with a tertiary NICU this time. But, it is still an inadequate percentage: At 22, 23, 24 and 25 weeks the percentages are 45%, 48%, 58%, 66% even at 26 weeks more than a third of babies are born in the wrong place (40%).

This means that substantial proportions of babies had to be transported during the first day of life to a tertiary unit, a process which we know increases all sorts of complications.

What can be done to improve these outcomes further?

The latest CNN annual report is now available on-line. The data are in many ways not comparable. They do not include babies never admitted to a participating hospital, so a baby born elsewhere and not referred for intensive care is nowhere to be found in the CNN report. However, I just wanted to point out that, of babies admitted to NICU in Canada at 25 weeks there was 78% survival, at 24 weeks there was 54% survival, and at 23 weeks there was 42% survival, all of these figures are around 10% better than the EPICURE data. So I think one thing that needs to be done in the UK is to get more of these babies born in tertiary care centers. Plus in Canada we still have more to do, survival rates seem to be substantially better in Japan than in Canada, what can we all do to improve survival and outcomes?

There are some pointers in the report of other things that can be done, in 2006 99% of the 26 weekers, 98% of the 25 weekers and 99% of the 24 week infants received surfactant. Which means that almost none of them were kept extubated during the first few days of life. I find that a little surprising, things were starting to change in terms of trying to use CPAP from birth in many places, but that obviously wasn’t the case in the British Isles in 2006. Early CPAP rather than routine intubation for surfactant appears to reduce severe BPD; BPD was very common in this cohort, but we don’t have any indication of severity.

We also now have probiotics which can reduce Necrotising Enterocolitis and mortality, and the incidence of late onset sepsis can be reduced with aggressive quality control and perhaps also with lactoferrin.

One thing that the investigators note is the older age of death in this cohort compared to the previous one, with half of the deaths occurring after the first week of life. Others have noted the same thing, these deaths are often due to NEC, Sepsis and sometimes to end-stage respiratory failure, EPICURE 2 showed a very high proportion of their late deaths were due to sepsis and NEC. If we can get reductions in those complications and also find ways to treat them better when they occur, we can really make a difference to survival, and to long term disability also, as BPD, NEC and Sepsis are major determinants of poorer long term outcomes.

Onto the second instalment; (Moore T, Hennessy EM, Myles J, Johnson SJ, Draper ES, Costeloe KL, Marlow N: Neurological and developmental outcome in extremely preterm children born in England in 1995 and 2006: the EPICure studies. BMJ 2012, 345:e7961.) The EPICURE investigators have followed up to 3 years of age a good proportion of the survivors. Much fewer than they would have liked however. Changes in certain regulations in the UK inhibited, and continue to inhibit, good follow up studies. So they had to estimate what the outcomes of the non-followed babies would have been, using the perinatal characteristics of the babies who were seen, and assuming that the influence of being a boy with sepsis (for example) was the same between babies who were examined and the others. This is called multiple imputation, and is the best you can do if you don’t have the children in front of you. Anyway the increase in survivors compared to the previous cohort was not associated with more impaired survivors, or indeed with a reduction in impairment. The proportions were almost identical. The proportions of severely impaired survivors are higher than in other regional cohorts such as from Victoria in Australia, which again I think shows that there are more improvements to be found.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Weekly Updates #17

Moon C, Lagercrantz H, Kuhl PK: Language experienced in utero affects vowel perception after birth: A two-country study. Acta Paediatrica 2012. This is neat, the researchers played recordings of different vowel sounds to Swedish and American babies who were just about 1 day old, sucking frequency changed when the vowel sounds that were from their own region were played to them compared to the non-native sounds. Looks like the vowel sounds the fetus heard before birth affect cerebral development some way, so that different vowel sounds after birth elicit different responses to those they have already heard.

Klinger G, Sokolover N, Boyko V, Sirota L, Lerner-Geva L, Reichman B, in collaboration with the Israel Neonatal N: Perinatal risk factors for bronchopulmonary dysplasia in a national cohort of very-low-birthweight infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012. An epidemiologic analysis of antecedents of BPD in a cohort from Israel. BPD was independently associated with young maternal age (odds ratio [OR], 1.53), maternal hypertensive disorders (OR, 1.28), antepartum hemorrhage (OR, 1.26), male gender (OR, 1.41), non-Jewish ethnicity (OR, 1.23), birth defects (OR, 1.94), small for gestational age (GA) (OR, 2.65), and delivery room resuscitation (OR, 1.86).

Carey JC: Perspectives on the care and management of infants with trisomy 18 and trisomy 13: Striving for balance. Current Opinion in Pediatrics 2012, 24(6):672-678. A very thoughtful review and opinion article about how to care for families with an infant who has trisomy 18 or 13.

Cheong JL, Coleman L, Hunt RW, Lee KJ, Doyle LW, Inder TE, Jacobs SE, Infant Cooling Evaluation C: Prognostic utility of magnetic resonance imaging in neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: Substudy of a randomized trial. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2012, 166(7):634-640. MRI is fairly predictive of death or major disability at 2 years of age. PPV for the abnomalities of white or grey matter that they investigated were mostly around 85%, so only 15% were survivors without major disability (false positives). There were a lot of false negatives though, around 40% of the babies with a normal MRI score in each category still had either death or major disability. Disability included Bayley Scores more than 2SD below the mean, which I have criticized before; a low Bayley score is not a disability. But in infants with HIE it does seem more predictive of future intellectual impairment than it is among ex-preterm infants.

Ferraretti AP, Goossens V, de Mouzon J, Bhattacharya S, Castilla JA, Korsak V, Kupka M, Nygren KG, Nyboe Andersen A, IVF-monitoring TE et al: Assisted reproductive technology in europe, 2008: Results generated from european registers by eshre. Human Reproduction 2012, 27(9):2571-2584. If you saw my other post earlier, this is the source of the European data, from 2008 of ART success and complication rates.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

One Babe at a Time: ART and a multiplicity of multiples

I have just written a review article which is in the submission revision process for a journal that shall remain nameless (I don’t know why, but that is the tradition, you don’t say which journal, until it gets accepted) It has been peer reviewed, and for the first time, I can truly say something that I often write in reviewer response letters, but which often isn’t really true, the reviewer really helped to improve the manuscript.

The subject is the pediatric implications of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. I reviewed many of the published articles about what ART does to babies and children. Mostly of course the children turn out fine, and many happy families have been created (or enlarged) by ART. On the other hand there are significant increases in several adverse outcomes: the main one being prematurity, which is largely because of twins, and triplets and more. Twins after ART are almost entirely due to the transfer of multiple embryos into the uterus after successful fertilization in the ‘test-tube’. There are a few twins even when a single embryo is transferred, as the embryo can split in two after transfer. (Single babies also have more complications after ART, but you will have to wait for the paper to have all the details, or do your own lit search.)

Annie Janvier and I started to get interested in this issue when we were in our previous positions, we experienced some very sad situations, with women who were already at very high risk of preterm delivery, for example, having 3 embryos transferred, becoming pregnant with twins and delivering twins at 24 weeks with multiple complications. There were many examples of complications that would have been avoided if a single embryo had been transferred. We wrote a paper in which we calculated the extra human, societal and financial costs of the irresponsible transfer of many embryos.

Since then in Quebec the government, after a consultation process in which Annie was heavily involved, decided to cover the costs of IVF for most women who wish to have the procedure, and accompanied the funding with a restriction on the numbers of embryos that can be transferred. Elective single embryo transfers immediately went from 6% to over 60%. There are some exceptions which allow 2 embryos to be transferred, based on maternal age and previous failed cycles, so we still had 30% with 2 embryos transferred, and a very small number with more than 2 (less than 1%). This has led to the most dramatic and fastest drop in multiple deliveries from ART anywhere. There was an instantaneous drop from 30% of IVF pregnancies being multiples, to 5% for the 1st 6 months of the program. This was accompanied by a modest increase in the total number of cycles. Further regulations changes are likely to completely ban more than 2 embryo transfers. Similar things have happened in the past in Sweden and in Belgium, but it took a little longer for them to achieve their goals. Until recently one of the countries with the highest proportion of multiple embryo transfers and multiple deliveries was Turkey, they had the highest number of triplet deliveries anywhere in the worldIVF triplets

This is a bubble plot showing the percentage of IVF transfers that were 3 or more embryos against the proportion of the pregnancies that result that are triplets. The area of each bubble is proportional to the number of transfers performed (Europe for example had 312,000 procedures and Australia/NZ had 11000). The solid bubbles are the individual countries of Europe, and the open circles are Europe, USA and Australia New Zealand. The data are from the latest publications of various registries: the European is from procedures done in 2008, the USA is from 2009, and the Australian 2010. You can see that the Australian and New Zealand data show almost no 3 embryo transfers and very few triplets (they also have only 8% twins). In 2008 Turkey had a lot of both, in contrast Sweden there were no transfers of more than 2 embryos, but they had one set of triplets, they are the extreme lower left filled circle.

I have a similar graph for twins, but that is part of the manuscript being considered right now by XXXXXX, oops, almost gave the journal name away!

In Turkey they were very worried about this, so in 2010 they passed legislation to limit embryos, using rules which are similar to the Belgium and Quebec rules. (Guzoglu N, Kanmaz HG, Dilli D, Uras N, Erdeve O, Dilmen U: The impact of the new turkish regulation, imposing single embryo transfer after assisted reproduction technology, on neonatal intensive care unit utilization: A single center experience. Human Reproduction 2012, 27(8):2384-2388) they have already seen a big improvement, with many fewer multiples.

One of the problems has been that pediatricians and neonatologists, who look after the end result of ART, have not been active in the debates about whether and how to control and limit the practices in many countries. When we get involved, as Annie Janvier and the Society of Neonatologists did in Quebec, we can have an impact.

In terms of total numbers of babies affected, the USA has the biggest problem at present. They have very very few single embryo transfers, 30% of the pregnancies are twins or more; of about 100000 procedures there were 38000 deliveries of which 1.6% were triplets, that is 1800 babies unnecessarily put at very high risk. The twins numerically are much more frequent, 22,800 twins born, of whom more than half will be preterm, many being extremely preterm. The current lack of regulation in the USA is putting many babies lives and futures at risk, as in several other countries.

Some of the regulations regarding IVF and embryo transfers are completely senseless. In Italy all embryos have to be transferred by law. Embryo freezing or disposal is not permitted, but at least there is a limit of 3 embryos that are allowed to be created. What this means is that the large bubble just below and to the left of Turkey is Italy, nearly 50% of the transfers are 3 embryos, and they have a triplet frequency of 2.7%. This legislation, which is supposed to protect the ‘rights’ of the embryos, actually puts them at risk, increasing the numbers of twins and triplets, and increasing complications and perinatal mortality.

We need to stop being passive in this debate. It is our patients that are suffering from what is an largely avoidable epidemic of multiple births.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Weekly Updates #16

Sarajuuri A, Jokinen E, Mildh L, Tujulin A-M, Mattila I, Valanne L, Lönnqvist T: Neurodevelopmental burden at age 5 years in patients with univentricular heart. Pediatrics 2012. This study followed infants with univentricular lesions, both hypoplastic left heart syndrome and other single ventricles. about a quarter had major neurodevelopmental dysfunction in both groups, full-scale IQ was lower in patients with HLHS and with single ventricle than controls. One thing I found very interesting were the actual numbers, median IQ was 97 for HLHS, 112 for single ventricle and 121 for the controls. 121! I guess the Finns are very smart people.

Shin M, Kucik JE, Siffel C, Lu C, Shaw GM, Canfield MA, Correa A: Improved survival among children with spina bifida in the united states. The Journal of Pediatrics 2012, 161(6):1132-1137.e1133. Survival to one year of age of infants born with spina bifida continues to improve in the USA, up to 93% overall, there are unexplained ethnic differences in survival (it is over 96% in white families), and survival is lower if the baby also has a serious congenital heart disease, or a high lesion, cervical or thoracic, or if born with very low birth weight.

Lee SK, Ye XY, Singhal N, De La Rue S, Lodha A, Shah PS, for The Canadian Neonatal N: Higher altitude and risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia among preterm infants. Amer J Perinatol 2012(EFirst). NICUs that were over 400m altitude had more babies with BPD after correcting for all the usual things than NICUs at less than 400m. I think the reliance on diagnosing BPD based on oxygen need is probably the issue here: you may also need more ventilation and O2 and therefore have more lung damage to keep the saturations at usual acceptable levels during the first days of life, but you will then also need some more oxygen to keep the alveolar PO2 at the same level as if you were at sea level. Don’t know what to do about this though, we should all move to the coast.

Natalucci G, Becker J, Becher K, Bickle GM, Landolt MA, Bucher HU. Self-perceived health status and mental health outcomes in young adults born with less than 1000 g. Acta Paediatrica. 2012 As Annie (Janvier) has said many times, we have thousands of publications detailing how screwed up preterm infants are (that is literally tue, there are thousands). In contrast very few studies of how to help them. This balance has changed in many fields, but not yet in neonatology. In contrast there is a growing recognition that most preterm infants turn out just fine! It is easier to write a paper saying that the proportions of preterm infants who have problems is increased by X%, but to recognize that most are functioning at a very acceptable to very high level is harder for people to state. The first sentence of the conclusions of this paper does have that balance, it starts, ‘Health status and mental health of former ELBW adults were overall satisfying. ‘

A similar comment starts ‘what does this mean’ section of the editorial by Michael Msall recently published in Acta. ‘First, the large majority of ELBW survivors (83%) are free of
neurosensory disability. Thus, unprecedented survival without major neurosensory disability can be expected.’ the editorial was commenting on the paper from Maureen Hack’s group, Litt JS, Taylor HG, Margevicius S, Schluchter M, Andreias L, Hack M: Academic achievement of adolescents born with extremely low birth weight. Acta Paediatrica 2012 which detailed the intellectual outcomes of 14 year olds who were babies born at less than 1 kg, that study noted yet again the specific difficulties with mathematics that are more frequent among former extremely preterm infants. They note that such infants might well benefit from specific interventions to improve these skills, but they don’t give any reference to such a program. It is about time we found ways to improve these outcomes, which are already very good, to further benefit our tiniest patients.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Leave a comment

New agents for hemodynamic support; how to evaluate them?

I have only ever prescribed a vasopressin infusion once for a baby. An infant was dying of septic shock and I done everything that I thought might help, without any evident benefit. So I decided to try vasopressin, based on case reports and series in older children and adults, and a few cases in newborns; the baby became immediately anuric, rather than oliguric, and although the blood pressure increased slightly everything else got worse (acidosis, oxygenation etc.)

Vasopressin, as the name implies, has vasoconstrictor effects, it might be helpful therefore if the major pathophysiology is vasodilatation; but when there is cardiac dysfunction it is unlikely to be helpful.

Now I didn’t write a case report of my experience, but another group who saw a positive response did so: (Radicioni M, Troiani S, Camerini PG. Effects of terlipressin on pulmonary artery pressure in a septic cooled infant: an echocardiographic assessment. J Perinatol. 2012;32(11):893-5.) That is of course a major problem with case reports of therapy; people tend to report when things go well, but not when they don’t! I think if everyone who had tried vasopressin (or terlipressin, a long acting analogue) with a poor response wrote up their experience we might have a much more representative literature, but good luck getting them published.

Pellicer A, Riera J, Lopez-Ortego P, Bravo MC, Madero R, Perez-Rodriguez J, et al. Phase 1 study of two inodilators in neonates undergoing cardiovascular surgery. Pediatr Res. 2012.This on the other hand is a much better way to introduce new agents into clinical use. Start with a small RCT with very careful evaluation of PK and PD. This was an RCT in 20 newborn infants who had cardiac surgery at 1 to 4 weeks of age. Many such babies get hemodynamic support after surgery, in this study they were randomized before surgery to either milrinone or levosimendan, which was started during the surgery, and continued for 48 hours, after that the study was no longer masked, as the milrinone continued, but the levosimendan stopped. It would probably be better to compare each to placebo (it was a masked trial) but that would raise its own ethical issues. The authors show very little difference between the agents, which means that either they are equally effective, or equally ineffective (which is the problem with not having a placebo group). One worrying thing the authors showed was the progressive accumulation of active metabolites of levosimendan, that didn’t appear to be cleared very well, and were still detectable 14 days later! There were some minor other differences between the groups, or uncertain significance.

I’m sure there will be another new agent along in a minute, it would be great if the initial reports of use were not case reports, which are completely unreliable and nearly always positive, but small careful RCTs evaluating safety, kinetics, and hemodynamic responses, like Adelina Pellicer’s group have done. Then moving on to adequately powered placebo controlled studies, like the excellent milrinone trial of Mary Paradisis and her co-workers.

Posted in Neonatal Research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment